|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
I agree that we shouldn't be inflating these numbers, and it's crystal clear that the more accurate numbers are still way, way, way too high for our number of school shootings and number of mass shootings each year.
|
On February 16 2018 09:43 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On February 15 2018 10:07 Plansix wrote:
There is no reasons to even argue that this will impact anything. We have not passed substantive gun laws at the federal level for +20 years. The CDC or any government agency cannot collect data on gun violence. After sandy hook the senate and House didn’t even have a debate about guns or debate a single bill. They didn’t even talk about it. But they did admonish Obama for talking about it. The gun manufacturers lobby, NRA and gun lovers have won for 20 year and there is no sign of that changing in the next ten. That's because the last time the CDC tried to gather data, they were led by a team of people who were politically motivated to basically institute a full out gun ban. Not to mention that their study and data was severely flawed, and were thoroughly debunked by multiple people. The NRA wasn't without fault; they definitely went way too far in that it wasn't an outright ban, but it did basically caused the CDC to never touch the subject again. However, don't try and spin it as though the left and the CDC didn't attempt their own political spin on the subject, they were out to basically institute a fullout gun ban which was and still is not feasible for multiple reasons.
Can you please provide a source for this? I hadn't read about the CDC's intention to institute a full-out gun ban.
|
On February 16 2018 09:43 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On February 15 2018 10:07 Plansix wrote:
There is no reasons to even argue that this will impact anything. We have not passed substantive gun laws at the federal level for +20 years. The CDC or any government agency cannot collect data on gun violence. After sandy hook the senate and House didn’t even have a debate about guns or debate a single bill. They didn’t even talk about it. But they did admonish Obama for talking about it. The gun manufacturers lobby, NRA and gun lovers have won for 20 year and there is no sign of that changing in the next ten. That's because the last time the CDC tried to gather data, they were led by a team of people who were politically motivated to basically institute a full out gun ban. Not to mention that their study and data was severely flawed, and were thoroughly debunked by multiple people. The NRA wasn't without fault; they definitely went way too far in that it wasn't an outright ban, but it did basically caused the CDC to never touch the subject again. However, don't try and spin it as though the left and the CDC didn't attempt their own political spin on the subject, they were out to basically institute a fullout gun ban which was and still is not feasible for multiple reasons.
Everything you says is likely true, but I don't give a shit. Its been +20 years, we have endless school shootings and background check system is as dysfunctional as ever. You got your way for 2 decades and the CDC couldn't collect data and everyone that wants guns can get guns. Including 18 year old kids that were kicked out of their high school for being violence and return to kill 17 of their former classmates. Our country has solved bigger problems than this and we can find a way to collect data on fire arms that won't be framed in an effort to create a gun ban. We can find people to do that and take that job seriously.
Edit: And lets not forget - Florida had this problem 2 years ago:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando_nightclub_shooting
Again, all fire arms purchased legally. The state did nothing after that shooting and the laws are unchanged.
|
On February 16 2018 09:49 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On February 16 2018 09:43 superstartran wrote:On February 15 2018 10:07 Plansix wrote:
There is no reasons to even argue that this will impact anything. We have not passed substantive gun laws at the federal level for +20 years. The CDC or any government agency cannot collect data on gun violence. After sandy hook the senate and House didn’t even have a debate about guns or debate a single bill. They didn’t even talk about it. But they did admonish Obama for talking about it. The gun manufacturers lobby, NRA and gun lovers have won for 20 year and there is no sign of that changing in the next ten. That's because the last time the CDC tried to gather data, they were led by a team of people who were politically motivated to basically institute a full out gun ban. Not to mention that their study and data was severely flawed, and were thoroughly debunked by multiple people. The NRA wasn't without fault; they definitely went way too far in that it wasn't an outright ban, but it did basically caused the CDC to never touch the subject again. However, don't try and spin it as though the left and the CDC didn't attempt their own political spin on the subject, they were out to basically institute a fullout gun ban which was and still is not feasible for multiple reasons. Can you please provide a source for this? I hadn't read about the CDC's intention to institute a full-out gun ban.
You can basically read about the history from a conservative/Republican viewpoint here
https://drgo.us/history-of-gun-control/
That being said, it doesn't take very much logic and research to find out that the conservative viewpoint isn't very far off from the actual truth, which was the CDC came in with an agenda to flat out ban guns, and used an extremely suspect study as their main piece of evidence.
On February 16 2018 09:52 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On February 16 2018 09:43 superstartran wrote:On February 15 2018 10:07 Plansix wrote:
There is no reasons to even argue that this will impact anything. We have not passed substantive gun laws at the federal level for +20 years. The CDC or any government agency cannot collect data on gun violence. After sandy hook the senate and House didn’t even have a debate about guns or debate a single bill. They didn’t even talk about it. But they did admonish Obama for talking about it. The gun manufacturers lobby, NRA and gun lovers have won for 20 year and there is no sign of that changing in the next ten. That's because the last time the CDC tried to gather data, they were led by a team of people who were politically motivated to basically institute a full out gun ban. Not to mention that their study and data was severely flawed, and were thoroughly debunked by multiple people. The NRA wasn't without fault; they definitely went way too far in that it wasn't an outright ban, but it did basically caused the CDC to never touch the subject again. However, don't try and spin it as though the left and the CDC didn't attempt their own political spin on the subject, they were out to basically institute a fullout gun ban which was and still is not feasible for multiple reasons. Everything you says is likely true, but I don't give a shit. Its been +20 years, we have endless school shootings and background check system is as dysfunctional as ever. You got your way for 2 decades and the CDC couldn't collect data and everyone that wants guns can get guns. Including 18 year old kids that were kicked out of their high school for being violence and return to kill 17 of their former classmates. Our country has solved bigger problems than this and we can find a way to collect data on fire arms that won't be framed in an effort to create a gun ban. We can find people to do that and take that job seriously. Edit: And lets not forget - Florida had this problem 2 years ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando_nightclub_shootingAgain, all fire arms purchased legally. The state did nothing after that shooting and the laws are unchanged.
Arguing from emotion will do nothing. I am not against stricter gun control laws; the real issue is that people react from emotion rather than logic and don't actually solve anything.
People think that there are mass shooters literally everywhere; that's not true at all. From the late 1980s to about 2016, violent crime rates dropped by a tremendous amount. They have risen since 2016, but we don't have enough data to attribute that to anything. It could be from mass shootings, the lack of police response to high urban areas for fear of scrutiny, etc.
|
On February 16 2018 09:40 Jockmcplop wrote:
I don't even see the need for it. There's no point inflating this stuff when such an awful mass shooting just happened. If these kids are just acceptable loss in an ideological battle then making up numbers isn't going to help.
I give that as a cautionary tale, since I saw it cited by TeamLiquid forum posters in US Pol and elect d politicians in America. You might not like the far right and what they stand for and even bring some stuff up for ridicule (infowars). Sure. Just recognize these far left groups do some pretty dishonest work, and you might take it as “they have no reason to purposefully mislead” vs “condemn the far-right for their lies and misrepresentations.” It passes in the dark for liberals, but people of the right see it and generalize that lies in service of political causes the left generally agrees with are merely passed over. No outrage, no NRA=domestic terrorists, only a shrug and ‘whoops.’
|
On February 16 2018 11:15 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On February 16 2018 09:49 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On February 16 2018 09:43 superstartran wrote:On February 15 2018 10:07 Plansix wrote:
There is no reasons to even argue that this will impact anything. We have not passed substantive gun laws at the federal level for +20 years. The CDC or any government agency cannot collect data on gun violence. After sandy hook the senate and House didn’t even have a debate about guns or debate a single bill. They didn’t even talk about it. But they did admonish Obama for talking about it. The gun manufacturers lobby, NRA and gun lovers have won for 20 year and there is no sign of that changing in the next ten. That's because the last time the CDC tried to gather data, they were led by a team of people who were politically motivated to basically institute a full out gun ban. Not to mention that their study and data was severely flawed, and were thoroughly debunked by multiple people. The NRA wasn't without fault; they definitely went way too far in that it wasn't an outright ban, but it did basically caused the CDC to never touch the subject again. However, don't try and spin it as though the left and the CDC didn't attempt their own political spin on the subject, they were out to basically institute a fullout gun ban which was and still is not feasible for multiple reasons. Can you please provide a source for this? I hadn't read about the CDC's intention to institute a full-out gun ban. You can basically read about the history from a conservative/Republican viewpoint here https://drgo.us/history-of-gun-control/That being said, it doesn't take very much logic and research to find out that the conservative viewpoint isn't very far off from the actual truth, which was the CDC came in with an agenda to flat out ban guns, and used an extremely suspect study as their main piece of evidence. Show nested quote +On February 16 2018 09:52 Plansix wrote:On February 16 2018 09:43 superstartran wrote:On February 15 2018 10:07 Plansix wrote:
There is no reasons to even argue that this will impact anything. We have not passed substantive gun laws at the federal level for +20 years. The CDC or any government agency cannot collect data on gun violence. After sandy hook the senate and House didn’t even have a debate about guns or debate a single bill. They didn’t even talk about it. But they did admonish Obama for talking about it. The gun manufacturers lobby, NRA and gun lovers have won for 20 year and there is no sign of that changing in the next ten. That's because the last time the CDC tried to gather data, they were led by a team of people who were politically motivated to basically institute a full out gun ban. Not to mention that their study and data was severely flawed, and were thoroughly debunked by multiple people. The NRA wasn't without fault; they definitely went way too far in that it wasn't an outright ban, but it did basically caused the CDC to never touch the subject again. However, don't try and spin it as though the left and the CDC didn't attempt their own political spin on the subject, they were out to basically institute a fullout gun ban which was and still is not feasible for multiple reasons. Everything you says is likely true, but I don't give a shit. Its been +20 years, we have endless school shootings and background check system is as dysfunctional as ever. You got your way for 2 decades and the CDC couldn't collect data and everyone that wants guns can get guns. Including 18 year old kids that were kicked out of their high school for being violence and return to kill 17 of their former classmates. Our country has solved bigger problems than this and we can find a way to collect data on fire arms that won't be framed in an effort to create a gun ban. We can find people to do that and take that job seriously. Edit: And lets not forget - Florida had this problem 2 years ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando_nightclub_shootingAgain, all fire arms purchased legally. The state did nothing after that shooting and the laws are unchanged. Arguing from emotion will do nothing. I am not against stricter gun control laws; the real issue is that people react from emotion rather than logic and don't actually solve anything. People think that there are mass shooters literally everywhere; that's not true at all. From the late 1980s to about 2016, violent crime rates dropped by a tremendous amount. They have risen since 2016, but we don't have enough data to attribute that to anything. It could be from mass shootings, the lack of police response to high urban areas for fear of scrutiny, etc.
Arguing from emotion is how gun owners and the gun lobby have won this debate for 20 year. There has never been a substantive threat of a gun ban or any measure of gun control that would involve the stripping of fire arms. Yet the NRA and gun lobby stokes those fears every time a democrat is elected. Why would I give up the tool the gun lobby and gun supporters have so effective used for two decades? We don’t know if gun violence has gone up or down, because we can’t collect data.
Quoting violent crime rates isn’t particularly productive when school shootings have become a fear of every parent. The reality of the matter is people feel unsafe and school shootings are more common than ever.
So if you support gun safety laws support them now.
|
On February 16 2018 11:31 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On February 16 2018 11:15 superstartran wrote:On February 16 2018 09:49 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On February 16 2018 09:43 superstartran wrote:On February 15 2018 10:07 Plansix wrote:
There is no reasons to even argue that this will impact anything. We have not passed substantive gun laws at the federal level for +20 years. The CDC or any government agency cannot collect data on gun violence. After sandy hook the senate and House didn’t even have a debate about guns or debate a single bill. They didn’t even talk about it. But they did admonish Obama for talking about it. The gun manufacturers lobby, NRA and gun lovers have won for 20 year and there is no sign of that changing in the next ten. That's because the last time the CDC tried to gather data, they were led by a team of people who were politically motivated to basically institute a full out gun ban. Not to mention that their study and data was severely flawed, and were thoroughly debunked by multiple people. The NRA wasn't without fault; they definitely went way too far in that it wasn't an outright ban, but it did basically caused the CDC to never touch the subject again. However, don't try and spin it as though the left and the CDC didn't attempt their own political spin on the subject, they were out to basically institute a fullout gun ban which was and still is not feasible for multiple reasons. Can you please provide a source for this? I hadn't read about the CDC's intention to institute a full-out gun ban. You can basically read about the history from a conservative/Republican viewpoint here https://drgo.us/history-of-gun-control/That being said, it doesn't take very much logic and research to find out that the conservative viewpoint isn't very far off from the actual truth, which was the CDC came in with an agenda to flat out ban guns, and used an extremely suspect study as their main piece of evidence. On February 16 2018 09:52 Plansix wrote:On February 16 2018 09:43 superstartran wrote:On February 15 2018 10:07 Plansix wrote:
There is no reasons to even argue that this will impact anything. We have not passed substantive gun laws at the federal level for +20 years. The CDC or any government agency cannot collect data on gun violence. After sandy hook the senate and House didn’t even have a debate about guns or debate a single bill. They didn’t even talk about it. But they did admonish Obama for talking about it. The gun manufacturers lobby, NRA and gun lovers have won for 20 year and there is no sign of that changing in the next ten. That's because the last time the CDC tried to gather data, they were led by a team of people who were politically motivated to basically institute a full out gun ban. Not to mention that their study and data was severely flawed, and were thoroughly debunked by multiple people. The NRA wasn't without fault; they definitely went way too far in that it wasn't an outright ban, but it did basically caused the CDC to never touch the subject again. However, don't try and spin it as though the left and the CDC didn't attempt their own political spin on the subject, they were out to basically institute a fullout gun ban which was and still is not feasible for multiple reasons. Everything you says is likely true, but I don't give a shit. Its been +20 years, we have endless school shootings and background check system is as dysfunctional as ever. You got your way for 2 decades and the CDC couldn't collect data and everyone that wants guns can get guns. Including 18 year old kids that were kicked out of their high school for being violence and return to kill 17 of their former classmates. Our country has solved bigger problems than this and we can find a way to collect data on fire arms that won't be framed in an effort to create a gun ban. We can find people to do that and take that job seriously. Edit: And lets not forget - Florida had this problem 2 years ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando_nightclub_shootingAgain, all fire arms purchased legally. The state did nothing after that shooting and the laws are unchanged. Arguing from emotion will do nothing. I am not against stricter gun control laws; the real issue is that people react from emotion rather than logic and don't actually solve anything. People think that there are mass shooters literally everywhere; that's not true at all. From the late 1980s to about 2016, violent crime rates dropped by a tremendous amount. They have risen since 2016, but we don't have enough data to attribute that to anything. It could be from mass shootings, the lack of police response to high urban areas for fear of scrutiny, etc. Arguing from emotion is how gun owners and the gun lobby have won this debate for 20 year. There has never been a substantive threat of a gun ban or any measure of gun control that would involve the stripping of fire arms. Yet the NRA and gun lobby stokes those fears every time a democrat is elected. Why would I give up the tool the gun lobby and gun supporters have so effective used for two decades? Because it is effective any undercuts your argument ? Quoting violent crime rates isn’t particularly productive when school shootings have become a fear of every parent. The reality of the matter is people feel unsafe and school shootings are more common than ever.
I'm confused, because last time I checked
+ Show Spoiler +“We’re going to systematically build a case that owning firearms causes deaths. We’re doing the most we can do, given the political realities.” (P.W. O’Carroll, Acting Section Head of Division of Injury Control, CDC, quoted in Marsha F. Goldsmith, “Epidemiologists Aim at New Target: Health Risk of Handgun Proliferation,” Journal of the American Medical Association vol. 261 no. 5, February 3, 1989, pp. 675-76.)
+ Show Spoiler +“Guns are a virus that must be eradicated.”—Dr. Katherine Christoffel, pediatrician, in American Medical News, January 3, 1994.
+ Show Spoiler +“Data on [assault weapons’] risks are not needed, because they have no redeeming social value.—Jerome Kassirer, M.D., former editor, New England Journal of Medicine, writing in vol. 326, no. 17, page 1161 (April 23, 1992).
+ Show Spoiler +"We need to revolutionize the way we look at guns, like what we did with cigarettes. It used to be that smoking was a glamour symbol -- cool, sexy, macho. Now it is dirty, deadly -- and banned." - Rosenberg, CDC Director
Not to mention that the government does track number of firearm victims (which includes suicides) and that number has gone down significantly since 1993.
https://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/gun-violence/pages/welcome.aspx
Or are you going to try and shame me now with how I should be horrified that children have died because of some asshole who couldn't properly adjust and handle his own emotions? Do I think it was too easy for him to purchase an AR-15, a semi automatic rifle that is easy to use, has plethora of tutorial videos, has low recoil, and has a rapid rate of fire? Yes, without a doubt. However, don't try and think for a second you're going to get away with trying to use the death of children to push the liberal agenda, because that's a load of horse shit and you know it.
|
On February 16 2018 11:35 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On February 16 2018 11:31 Plansix wrote:On February 16 2018 11:15 superstartran wrote:On February 16 2018 09:49 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On February 16 2018 09:43 superstartran wrote:On February 15 2018 10:07 Plansix wrote:
There is no reasons to even argue that this will impact anything. We have not passed substantive gun laws at the federal level for +20 years. The CDC or any government agency cannot collect data on gun violence. After sandy hook the senate and House didn’t even have a debate about guns or debate a single bill. They didn’t even talk about it. But they did admonish Obama for talking about it. The gun manufacturers lobby, NRA and gun lovers have won for 20 year and there is no sign of that changing in the next ten. That's because the last time the CDC tried to gather data, they were led by a team of people who were politically motivated to basically institute a full out gun ban. Not to mention that their study and data was severely flawed, and were thoroughly debunked by multiple people. The NRA wasn't without fault; they definitely went way too far in that it wasn't an outright ban, but it did basically caused the CDC to never touch the subject again. However, don't try and spin it as though the left and the CDC didn't attempt their own political spin on the subject, they were out to basically institute a fullout gun ban which was and still is not feasible for multiple reasons. Can you please provide a source for this? I hadn't read about the CDC's intention to institute a full-out gun ban. You can basically read about the history from a conservative/Republican viewpoint here https://drgo.us/history-of-gun-control/That being said, it doesn't take very much logic and research to find out that the conservative viewpoint isn't very far off from the actual truth, which was the CDC came in with an agenda to flat out ban guns, and used an extremely suspect study as their main piece of evidence. On February 16 2018 09:52 Plansix wrote:On February 16 2018 09:43 superstartran wrote:On February 15 2018 10:07 Plansix wrote:
There is no reasons to even argue that this will impact anything. We have not passed substantive gun laws at the federal level for +20 years. The CDC or any government agency cannot collect data on gun violence. After sandy hook the senate and House didn’t even have a debate about guns or debate a single bill. They didn’t even talk about it. But they did admonish Obama for talking about it. The gun manufacturers lobby, NRA and gun lovers have won for 20 year and there is no sign of that changing in the next ten. That's because the last time the CDC tried to gather data, they were led by a team of people who were politically motivated to basically institute a full out gun ban. Not to mention that their study and data was severely flawed, and were thoroughly debunked by multiple people. The NRA wasn't without fault; they definitely went way too far in that it wasn't an outright ban, but it did basically caused the CDC to never touch the subject again. However, don't try and spin it as though the left and the CDC didn't attempt their own political spin on the subject, they were out to basically institute a fullout gun ban which was and still is not feasible for multiple reasons. Everything you says is likely true, but I don't give a shit. Its been +20 years, we have endless school shootings and background check system is as dysfunctional as ever. You got your way for 2 decades and the CDC couldn't collect data and everyone that wants guns can get guns. Including 18 year old kids that were kicked out of their high school for being violence and return to kill 17 of their former classmates. Our country has solved bigger problems than this and we can find a way to collect data on fire arms that won't be framed in an effort to create a gun ban. We can find people to do that and take that job seriously. Edit: And lets not forget - Florida had this problem 2 years ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando_nightclub_shootingAgain, all fire arms purchased legally. The state did nothing after that shooting and the laws are unchanged. Arguing from emotion will do nothing. I am not against stricter gun control laws; the real issue is that people react from emotion rather than logic and don't actually solve anything. People think that there are mass shooters literally everywhere; that's not true at all. From the late 1980s to about 2016, violent crime rates dropped by a tremendous amount. They have risen since 2016, but we don't have enough data to attribute that to anything. It could be from mass shootings, the lack of police response to high urban areas for fear of scrutiny, etc. Arguing from emotion is how gun owners and the gun lobby have won this debate for 20 year. There has never been a substantive threat of a gun ban or any measure of gun control that would involve the stripping of fire arms. Yet the NRA and gun lobby stokes those fears every time a democrat is elected. Why would I give up the tool the gun lobby and gun supporters have so effective used for two decades? Because it is effective any undercuts your argument ? Quoting violent crime rates isn’t particularly productive when school shootings have become a fear of every parent. The reality of the matter is people feel unsafe and school shootings are more common than ever. I'm confused, because last time I checked + Show Spoiler +“We’re going to systematically build a case that owning firearms causes deaths. We’re doing the most we can do, given the political realities.” (P.W. O’Carroll, Acting Section Head of Division of Injury Control, CDC, quoted in Marsha F. Goldsmith, “Epidemiologists Aim at New Target: Health Risk of Handgun Proliferation,” Journal of the American Medical Association vol. 261 no. 5, February 3, 1989, pp. 675-76.) “Guns are a virus that must be eradicated.”—Dr. Katherine Christoffel, pediatrician, in American Medical News, January 3, 1994. “Data on [assault weapons’] risks are not needed, because they have no redeeming social value.—Jerome Kassirer, M.D., former editor, New England Journal of Medicine, writing in vol. 326, no. 17, page 1161 (April 23, 1992). "We need to revolutionize the way we look at guns, like what we did with cigarettes. It used to be that smoking was a glamour symbol -- cool, sexy, macho. Now it is dirty, deadly -- and banned." - Rosenberg, CDC Director
What year is it? And when did the CDC write gun legislation?
Edit: don’t come at me with your fake outrage about me pushing an agenda. 23 children died in Sandy Hook and congress didn’t even debate the issue. It wasn’t given a moment of discussion on the floor of congress.
If you want to live in your NRA fantasy land that it’s the 1990s and the CDC is somehow going to magically pass gun laws by releasing data on guns, that is on you. But it’s 20 years later and 17 kids are dead. And our government won’t even talk about it because the gun lobby reminds them who’s agenda keeps them in office.
|
On February 16 2018 11:39 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On February 16 2018 11:35 superstartran wrote:On February 16 2018 11:31 Plansix wrote:On February 16 2018 11:15 superstartran wrote:On February 16 2018 09:49 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On February 16 2018 09:43 superstartran wrote:On February 15 2018 10:07 Plansix wrote:
There is no reasons to even argue that this will impact anything. We have not passed substantive gun laws at the federal level for +20 years. The CDC or any government agency cannot collect data on gun violence. After sandy hook the senate and House didn’t even have a debate about guns or debate a single bill. They didn’t even talk about it. But they did admonish Obama for talking about it. The gun manufacturers lobby, NRA and gun lovers have won for 20 year and there is no sign of that changing in the next ten. That's because the last time the CDC tried to gather data, they were led by a team of people who were politically motivated to basically institute a full out gun ban. Not to mention that their study and data was severely flawed, and were thoroughly debunked by multiple people. The NRA wasn't without fault; they definitely went way too far in that it wasn't an outright ban, but it did basically caused the CDC to never touch the subject again. However, don't try and spin it as though the left and the CDC didn't attempt their own political spin on the subject, they were out to basically institute a fullout gun ban which was and still is not feasible for multiple reasons. Can you please provide a source for this? I hadn't read about the CDC's intention to institute a full-out gun ban. You can basically read about the history from a conservative/Republican viewpoint here https://drgo.us/history-of-gun-control/That being said, it doesn't take very much logic and research to find out that the conservative viewpoint isn't very far off from the actual truth, which was the CDC came in with an agenda to flat out ban guns, and used an extremely suspect study as their main piece of evidence. On February 16 2018 09:52 Plansix wrote:On February 16 2018 09:43 superstartran wrote:On February 15 2018 10:07 Plansix wrote:
There is no reasons to even argue that this will impact anything. We have not passed substantive gun laws at the federal level for +20 years. The CDC or any government agency cannot collect data on gun violence. After sandy hook the senate and House didn’t even have a debate about guns or debate a single bill. They didn’t even talk about it. But they did admonish Obama for talking about it. The gun manufacturers lobby, NRA and gun lovers have won for 20 year and there is no sign of that changing in the next ten. That's because the last time the CDC tried to gather data, they were led by a team of people who were politically motivated to basically institute a full out gun ban. Not to mention that their study and data was severely flawed, and were thoroughly debunked by multiple people. The NRA wasn't without fault; they definitely went way too far in that it wasn't an outright ban, but it did basically caused the CDC to never touch the subject again. However, don't try and spin it as though the left and the CDC didn't attempt their own political spin on the subject, they were out to basically institute a fullout gun ban which was and still is not feasible for multiple reasons. Everything you says is likely true, but I don't give a shit. Its been +20 years, we have endless school shootings and background check system is as dysfunctional as ever. You got your way for 2 decades and the CDC couldn't collect data and everyone that wants guns can get guns. Including 18 year old kids that were kicked out of their high school for being violence and return to kill 17 of their former classmates. Our country has solved bigger problems than this and we can find a way to collect data on fire arms that won't be framed in an effort to create a gun ban. We can find people to do that and take that job seriously. Edit: And lets not forget - Florida had this problem 2 years ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando_nightclub_shootingAgain, all fire arms purchased legally. The state did nothing after that shooting and the laws are unchanged. Arguing from emotion will do nothing. I am not against stricter gun control laws; the real issue is that people react from emotion rather than logic and don't actually solve anything. People think that there are mass shooters literally everywhere; that's not true at all. From the late 1980s to about 2016, violent crime rates dropped by a tremendous amount. They have risen since 2016, but we don't have enough data to attribute that to anything. It could be from mass shootings, the lack of police response to high urban areas for fear of scrutiny, etc. Arguing from emotion is how gun owners and the gun lobby have won this debate for 20 year. There has never been a substantive threat of a gun ban or any measure of gun control that would involve the stripping of fire arms. Yet the NRA and gun lobby stokes those fears every time a democrat is elected. Why would I give up the tool the gun lobby and gun supporters have so effective used for two decades? Because it is effective any undercuts your argument ? Quoting violent crime rates isn’t particularly productive when school shootings have become a fear of every parent. The reality of the matter is people feel unsafe and school shootings are more common than ever. I'm confused, because last time I checked + Show Spoiler +“We’re going to systematically build a case that owning firearms causes deaths. We’re doing the most we can do, given the political realities.” (P.W. O’Carroll, Acting Section Head of Division of Injury Control, CDC, quoted in Marsha F. Goldsmith, “Epidemiologists Aim at New Target: Health Risk of Handgun Proliferation,” Journal of the American Medical Association vol. 261 no. 5, February 3, 1989, pp. 675-76.) “Guns are a virus that must be eradicated.”—Dr. Katherine Christoffel, pediatrician, in American Medical News, January 3, 1994. “Data on [assault weapons’] risks are not needed, because they have no redeeming social value.—Jerome Kassirer, M.D., former editor, New England Journal of Medicine, writing in vol. 326, no. 17, page 1161 (April 23, 1992). "We need to revolutionize the way we look at guns, like what we did with cigarettes. It used to be that smoking was a glamour symbol -- cool, sexy, macho. Now it is dirty, deadly -- and banned." - Rosenberg, CDC Director What year is it? And when did the CDC write gun legislation?
You realize that the CDC actually did studies in 2003 and 2013 and found no discernible evidence regarding the linking of gun control laws and fire arm related crimes right? But why would you let facts get in the way of fitting your narrative. You're right, it's fucking an atrocity and terrible that those teachers and children were killed by some scumbag who couldn't handle the world, so he took it out on innocent people. But you need to fucking slow the fuck down first, and think first. Remember, I am not against additional realistic and effective gun control, as neither are many members of the NRA despite popular opinion. The only thing many of us are trying to say is that the liberal left tends to try and paint firearms in a very negative light for no reason other than to push their own agenda.
|
On February 16 2018 11:49 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On February 16 2018 11:39 Plansix wrote:On February 16 2018 11:35 superstartran wrote:On February 16 2018 11:31 Plansix wrote:On February 16 2018 11:15 superstartran wrote:On February 16 2018 09:49 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On February 16 2018 09:43 superstartran wrote:On February 15 2018 10:07 Plansix wrote:
There is no reasons to even argue that this will impact anything. We have not passed substantive gun laws at the federal level for +20 years. The CDC or any government agency cannot collect data on gun violence. After sandy hook the senate and House didn’t even have a debate about guns or debate a single bill. They didn’t even talk about it. But they did admonish Obama for talking about it. The gun manufacturers lobby, NRA and gun lovers have won for 20 year and there is no sign of that changing in the next ten. That's because the last time the CDC tried to gather data, they were led by a team of people who were politically motivated to basically institute a full out gun ban. Not to mention that their study and data was severely flawed, and were thoroughly debunked by multiple people. The NRA wasn't without fault; they definitely went way too far in that it wasn't an outright ban, but it did basically caused the CDC to never touch the subject again. However, don't try and spin it as though the left and the CDC didn't attempt their own political spin on the subject, they were out to basically institute a fullout gun ban which was and still is not feasible for multiple reasons. Can you please provide a source for this? I hadn't read about the CDC's intention to institute a full-out gun ban. You can basically read about the history from a conservative/Republican viewpoint here https://drgo.us/history-of-gun-control/That being said, it doesn't take very much logic and research to find out that the conservative viewpoint isn't very far off from the actual truth, which was the CDC came in with an agenda to flat out ban guns, and used an extremely suspect study as their main piece of evidence. On February 16 2018 09:52 Plansix wrote:On February 16 2018 09:43 superstartran wrote:On February 15 2018 10:07 Plansix wrote:
There is no reasons to even argue that this will impact anything. We have not passed substantive gun laws at the federal level for +20 years. The CDC or any government agency cannot collect data on gun violence. After sandy hook the senate and House didn’t even have a debate about guns or debate a single bill. They didn’t even talk about it. But they did admonish Obama for talking about it. The gun manufacturers lobby, NRA and gun lovers have won for 20 year and there is no sign of that changing in the next ten. That's because the last time the CDC tried to gather data, they were led by a team of people who were politically motivated to basically institute a full out gun ban. Not to mention that their study and data was severely flawed, and were thoroughly debunked by multiple people. The NRA wasn't without fault; they definitely went way too far in that it wasn't an outright ban, but it did basically caused the CDC to never touch the subject again. However, don't try and spin it as though the left and the CDC didn't attempt their own political spin on the subject, they were out to basically institute a fullout gun ban which was and still is not feasible for multiple reasons. Everything you says is likely true, but I don't give a shit. Its been +20 years, we have endless school shootings and background check system is as dysfunctional as ever. You got your way for 2 decades and the CDC couldn't collect data and everyone that wants guns can get guns. Including 18 year old kids that were kicked out of their high school for being violence and return to kill 17 of their former classmates. Our country has solved bigger problems than this and we can find a way to collect data on fire arms that won't be framed in an effort to create a gun ban. We can find people to do that and take that job seriously. Edit: And lets not forget - Florida had this problem 2 years ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando_nightclub_shootingAgain, all fire arms purchased legally. The state did nothing after that shooting and the laws are unchanged. Arguing from emotion will do nothing. I am not against stricter gun control laws; the real issue is that people react from emotion rather than logic and don't actually solve anything. People think that there are mass shooters literally everywhere; that's not true at all. From the late 1980s to about 2016, violent crime rates dropped by a tremendous amount. They have risen since 2016, but we don't have enough data to attribute that to anything. It could be from mass shootings, the lack of police response to high urban areas for fear of scrutiny, etc. Arguing from emotion is how gun owners and the gun lobby have won this debate for 20 year. There has never been a substantive threat of a gun ban or any measure of gun control that would involve the stripping of fire arms. Yet the NRA and gun lobby stokes those fears every time a democrat is elected. Why would I give up the tool the gun lobby and gun supporters have so effective used for two decades? Because it is effective any undercuts your argument ? Quoting violent crime rates isn’t particularly productive when school shootings have become a fear of every parent. The reality of the matter is people feel unsafe and school shootings are more common than ever. I'm confused, because last time I checked + Show Spoiler +“We’re going to systematically build a case that owning firearms causes deaths. We’re doing the most we can do, given the political realities.” (P.W. O’Carroll, Acting Section Head of Division of Injury Control, CDC, quoted in Marsha F. Goldsmith, “Epidemiologists Aim at New Target: Health Risk of Handgun Proliferation,” Journal of the American Medical Association vol. 261 no. 5, February 3, 1989, pp. 675-76.) “Guns are a virus that must be eradicated.”—Dr. Katherine Christoffel, pediatrician, in American Medical News, January 3, 1994. “Data on [assault weapons’] risks are not needed, because they have no redeeming social value.—Jerome Kassirer, M.D., former editor, New England Journal of Medicine, writing in vol. 326, no. 17, page 1161 (April 23, 1992). "We need to revolutionize the way we look at guns, like what we did with cigarettes. It used to be that smoking was a glamour symbol -- cool, sexy, macho. Now it is dirty, deadly -- and banned." - Rosenberg, CDC Director What year is it? And when did the CDC write gun legislation? You realize that the CDC actually did studies in 2003 and 2013 and found no discernible evidence regarding the linking of gun control laws and fire arm related crimes right? But why would you let facts get in the way of fitting your narrative. You're right, it's fucking an atrocity and terrible that those teachers and children were killed by some scumbag who couldn't handle the world, so he took it out on innocent people. But you need to fucking slow the fuck down first, and think first. Remember, I am not against additional realistic and effective gun control, as neither are many members of the NRA despite popular opinion. The only thing many of us are trying to say is that the liberal left tends to try and paint firearms in a very negative light for no reason other than to push their own agenda.
Then why have there been zero gun federal gun laws for 20 years? Why has the Republican Party and the NRA not brought for a single reasonable gun law in 20 years? They control the House for all that time and not one. That is like saying your a huge fan of the opera and always have been, but you’ve never been to a show. Or this is all lip service and you just hate the opera, but know it would be unpopular to admit it.
|
On February 16 2018 11:49 superstartran wrote:Show nested quote +On February 16 2018 11:39 Plansix wrote:On February 16 2018 11:35 superstartran wrote:On February 16 2018 11:31 Plansix wrote:On February 16 2018 11:15 superstartran wrote:On February 16 2018 09:49 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On February 16 2018 09:43 superstartran wrote:On February 15 2018 10:07 Plansix wrote:
There is no reasons to even argue that this will impact anything. We have not passed substantive gun laws at the federal level for +20 years. The CDC or any government agency cannot collect data on gun violence. After sandy hook the senate and House didn’t even have a debate about guns or debate a single bill. They didn’t even talk about it. But they did admonish Obama for talking about it. The gun manufacturers lobby, NRA and gun lovers have won for 20 year and there is no sign of that changing in the next ten. That's because the last time the CDC tried to gather data, they were led by a team of people who were politically motivated to basically institute a full out gun ban. Not to mention that their study and data was severely flawed, and were thoroughly debunked by multiple people. The NRA wasn't without fault; they definitely went way too far in that it wasn't an outright ban, but it did basically caused the CDC to never touch the subject again. However, don't try and spin it as though the left and the CDC didn't attempt their own political spin on the subject, they were out to basically institute a fullout gun ban which was and still is not feasible for multiple reasons. Can you please provide a source for this? I hadn't read about the CDC's intention to institute a full-out gun ban. You can basically read about the history from a conservative/Republican viewpoint here https://drgo.us/history-of-gun-control/That being said, it doesn't take very much logic and research to find out that the conservative viewpoint isn't very far off from the actual truth, which was the CDC came in with an agenda to flat out ban guns, and used an extremely suspect study as their main piece of evidence. On February 16 2018 09:52 Plansix wrote:On February 16 2018 09:43 superstartran wrote:On February 15 2018 10:07 Plansix wrote:
There is no reasons to even argue that this will impact anything. We have not passed substantive gun laws at the federal level for +20 years. The CDC or any government agency cannot collect data on gun violence. After sandy hook the senate and House didn’t even have a debate about guns or debate a single bill. They didn’t even talk about it. But they did admonish Obama for talking about it. The gun manufacturers lobby, NRA and gun lovers have won for 20 year and there is no sign of that changing in the next ten. That's because the last time the CDC tried to gather data, they were led by a team of people who were politically motivated to basically institute a full out gun ban. Not to mention that their study and data was severely flawed, and were thoroughly debunked by multiple people. The NRA wasn't without fault; they definitely went way too far in that it wasn't an outright ban, but it did basically caused the CDC to never touch the subject again. However, don't try and spin it as though the left and the CDC didn't attempt their own political spin on the subject, they were out to basically institute a fullout gun ban which was and still is not feasible for multiple reasons. Everything you says is likely true, but I don't give a shit. Its been +20 years, we have endless school shootings and background check system is as dysfunctional as ever. You got your way for 2 decades and the CDC couldn't collect data and everyone that wants guns can get guns. Including 18 year old kids that were kicked out of their high school for being violence and return to kill 17 of their former classmates. Our country has solved bigger problems than this and we can find a way to collect data on fire arms that won't be framed in an effort to create a gun ban. We can find people to do that and take that job seriously. Edit: And lets not forget - Florida had this problem 2 years ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando_nightclub_shootingAgain, all fire arms purchased legally. The state did nothing after that shooting and the laws are unchanged. Arguing from emotion will do nothing. I am not against stricter gun control laws; the real issue is that people react from emotion rather than logic and don't actually solve anything. People think that there are mass shooters literally everywhere; that's not true at all. From the late 1980s to about 2016, violent crime rates dropped by a tremendous amount. They have risen since 2016, but we don't have enough data to attribute that to anything. It could be from mass shootings, the lack of police response to high urban areas for fear of scrutiny, etc. Arguing from emotion is how gun owners and the gun lobby have won this debate for 20 year. There has never been a substantive threat of a gun ban or any measure of gun control that would involve the stripping of fire arms. Yet the NRA and gun lobby stokes those fears every time a democrat is elected. Why would I give up the tool the gun lobby and gun supporters have so effective used for two decades? Because it is effective any undercuts your argument ? Quoting violent crime rates isn’t particularly productive when school shootings have become a fear of every parent. The reality of the matter is people feel unsafe and school shootings are more common than ever. I'm confused, because last time I checked + Show Spoiler +“We’re going to systematically build a case that owning firearms causes deaths. We’re doing the most we can do, given the political realities.” (P.W. O’Carroll, Acting Section Head of Division of Injury Control, CDC, quoted in Marsha F. Goldsmith, “Epidemiologists Aim at New Target: Health Risk of Handgun Proliferation,” Journal of the American Medical Association vol. 261 no. 5, February 3, 1989, pp. 675-76.) “Guns are a virus that must be eradicated.”—Dr. Katherine Christoffel, pediatrician, in American Medical News, January 3, 1994. “Data on [assault weapons’] risks are not needed, because they have no redeeming social value.—Jerome Kassirer, M.D., former editor, New England Journal of Medicine, writing in vol. 326, no. 17, page 1161 (April 23, 1992). "We need to revolutionize the way we look at guns, like what we did with cigarettes. It used to be that smoking was a glamour symbol -- cool, sexy, macho. Now it is dirty, deadly -- and banned." - Rosenberg, CDC Director What year is it? And when did the CDC write gun legislation? You realize that the CDC actually did studies in 2003 and 2013 and found no discernible evidence regarding the linking of gun control laws and fire arm related crimes right? But why would you let facts get in the way of fitting your narrative. You're right, it's fucking an atrocity and terrible that those teachers and children were killed by some scumbag who couldn't handle the world, so he took it out on innocent people. But you need to fucking slow the fuck down first, and think first. Remember, I am not against additional realistic and effective gun control, as neither are many members of the NRA despite popular opinion. The only thing many of us are trying to say is that the liberal left tends to try and paint firearms in a very negative light for no reason other than to push their own agenda.
It seems pretty clear that the bulk of the NRA and Republican lawmakers are in no way in favor of additional gun control. It also seems like you're ignoring facts if you're in favor of additional gun control even though the CDC found that additional gun control doesn't help.
|
On February 16 2018 11:54 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On February 16 2018 11:49 superstartran wrote:On February 16 2018 11:39 Plansix wrote:On February 16 2018 11:35 superstartran wrote:On February 16 2018 11:31 Plansix wrote:On February 16 2018 11:15 superstartran wrote:On February 16 2018 09:49 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On February 16 2018 09:43 superstartran wrote:On February 15 2018 10:07 Plansix wrote:
There is no reasons to even argue that this will impact anything. We have not passed substantive gun laws at the federal level for +20 years. The CDC or any government agency cannot collect data on gun violence. After sandy hook the senate and House didn’t even have a debate about guns or debate a single bill. They didn’t even talk about it. But they did admonish Obama for talking about it. The gun manufacturers lobby, NRA and gun lovers have won for 20 year and there is no sign of that changing in the next ten. That's because the last time the CDC tried to gather data, they were led by a team of people who were politically motivated to basically institute a full out gun ban. Not to mention that their study and data was severely flawed, and were thoroughly debunked by multiple people. The NRA wasn't without fault; they definitely went way too far in that it wasn't an outright ban, but it did basically caused the CDC to never touch the subject again. However, don't try and spin it as though the left and the CDC didn't attempt their own political spin on the subject, they were out to basically institute a fullout gun ban which was and still is not feasible for multiple reasons. Can you please provide a source for this? I hadn't read about the CDC's intention to institute a full-out gun ban. You can basically read about the history from a conservative/Republican viewpoint here https://drgo.us/history-of-gun-control/That being said, it doesn't take very much logic and research to find out that the conservative viewpoint isn't very far off from the actual truth, which was the CDC came in with an agenda to flat out ban guns, and used an extremely suspect study as their main piece of evidence. On February 16 2018 09:52 Plansix wrote:On February 16 2018 09:43 superstartran wrote:On February 15 2018 10:07 Plansix wrote:
There is no reasons to even argue that this will impact anything. We have not passed substantive gun laws at the federal level for +20 years. The CDC or any government agency cannot collect data on gun violence. After sandy hook the senate and House didn’t even have a debate about guns or debate a single bill. They didn’t even talk about it. But they did admonish Obama for talking about it. The gun manufacturers lobby, NRA and gun lovers have won for 20 year and there is no sign of that changing in the next ten. That's because the last time the CDC tried to gather data, they were led by a team of people who were politically motivated to basically institute a full out gun ban. Not to mention that their study and data was severely flawed, and were thoroughly debunked by multiple people. The NRA wasn't without fault; they definitely went way too far in that it wasn't an outright ban, but it did basically caused the CDC to never touch the subject again. However, don't try and spin it as though the left and the CDC didn't attempt their own political spin on the subject, they were out to basically institute a fullout gun ban which was and still is not feasible for multiple reasons. Everything you says is likely true, but I don't give a shit. Its been +20 years, we have endless school shootings and background check system is as dysfunctional as ever. You got your way for 2 decades and the CDC couldn't collect data and everyone that wants guns can get guns. Including 18 year old kids that were kicked out of their high school for being violence and return to kill 17 of their former classmates. Our country has solved bigger problems than this and we can find a way to collect data on fire arms that won't be framed in an effort to create a gun ban. We can find people to do that and take that job seriously. Edit: And lets not forget - Florida had this problem 2 years ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando_nightclub_shootingAgain, all fire arms purchased legally. The state did nothing after that shooting and the laws are unchanged. Arguing from emotion will do nothing. I am not against stricter gun control laws; the real issue is that people react from emotion rather than logic and don't actually solve anything. People think that there are mass shooters literally everywhere; that's not true at all. From the late 1980s to about 2016, violent crime rates dropped by a tremendous amount. They have risen since 2016, but we don't have enough data to attribute that to anything. It could be from mass shootings, the lack of police response to high urban areas for fear of scrutiny, etc. Arguing from emotion is how gun owners and the gun lobby have won this debate for 20 year. There has never been a substantive threat of a gun ban or any measure of gun control that would involve the stripping of fire arms. Yet the NRA and gun lobby stokes those fears every time a democrat is elected. Why would I give up the tool the gun lobby and gun supporters have so effective used for two decades? Because it is effective any undercuts your argument ? Quoting violent crime rates isn’t particularly productive when school shootings have become a fear of every parent. The reality of the matter is people feel unsafe and school shootings are more common than ever. I'm confused, because last time I checked + Show Spoiler +“We’re going to systematically build a case that owning firearms causes deaths. We’re doing the most we can do, given the political realities.” (P.W. O’Carroll, Acting Section Head of Division of Injury Control, CDC, quoted in Marsha F. Goldsmith, “Epidemiologists Aim at New Target: Health Risk of Handgun Proliferation,” Journal of the American Medical Association vol. 261 no. 5, February 3, 1989, pp. 675-76.) “Guns are a virus that must be eradicated.”—Dr. Katherine Christoffel, pediatrician, in American Medical News, January 3, 1994. “Data on [assault weapons’] risks are not needed, because they have no redeeming social value.—Jerome Kassirer, M.D., former editor, New England Journal of Medicine, writing in vol. 326, no. 17, page 1161 (April 23, 1992). "We need to revolutionize the way we look at guns, like what we did with cigarettes. It used to be that smoking was a glamour symbol -- cool, sexy, macho. Now it is dirty, deadly -- and banned." - Rosenberg, CDC Director What year is it? And when did the CDC write gun legislation? You realize that the CDC actually did studies in 2003 and 2013 and found no discernible evidence regarding the linking of gun control laws and fire arm related crimes right? But why would you let facts get in the way of fitting your narrative. You're right, it's fucking an atrocity and terrible that those teachers and children were killed by some scumbag who couldn't handle the world, so he took it out on innocent people. But you need to fucking slow the fuck down first, and think first. Remember, I am not against additional realistic and effective gun control, as neither are many members of the NRA despite popular opinion. The only thing many of us are trying to say is that the liberal left tends to try and paint firearms in a very negative light for no reason other than to push their own agenda. Then why have there been zero gun federal gun laws for 20 years? Why has the Republican Party and the NRA not brought for a single reasonable gun law in 20 years? They control the House for all that time and not one. That is like saying your a huge fan of the opera and always have been, but you’ve never been to a show. Or this is all lip service and you just hate the opera, but know it would be unpopular to admit it.
That's because passing Federal Law and regulating/enforcing it is extremely difficult, especially when the vast majority of gun control laws are on a state by state basis currently. Once you start using the federal government to regulate and enforce guns, then it becomes a constitutional issue. This is a much more complex and complicated issue than you actually think, and it's not simple as "ban all semi-automatic weapons" or "ban all guns".
On February 16 2018 12:02 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On February 16 2018 11:49 superstartran wrote:On February 16 2018 11:39 Plansix wrote:On February 16 2018 11:35 superstartran wrote:On February 16 2018 11:31 Plansix wrote:On February 16 2018 11:15 superstartran wrote:On February 16 2018 09:49 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On February 16 2018 09:43 superstartran wrote:On February 15 2018 10:07 Plansix wrote:
There is no reasons to even argue that this will impact anything. We have not passed substantive gun laws at the federal level for +20 years. The CDC or any government agency cannot collect data on gun violence. After sandy hook the senate and House didn’t even have a debate about guns or debate a single bill. They didn’t even talk about it. But they did admonish Obama for talking about it. The gun manufacturers lobby, NRA and gun lovers have won for 20 year and there is no sign of that changing in the next ten. That's because the last time the CDC tried to gather data, they were led by a team of people who were politically motivated to basically institute a full out gun ban. Not to mention that their study and data was severely flawed, and were thoroughly debunked by multiple people. The NRA wasn't without fault; they definitely went way too far in that it wasn't an outright ban, but it did basically caused the CDC to never touch the subject again. However, don't try and spin it as though the left and the CDC didn't attempt their own political spin on the subject, they were out to basically institute a fullout gun ban which was and still is not feasible for multiple reasons. Can you please provide a source for this? I hadn't read about the CDC's intention to institute a full-out gun ban. You can basically read about the history from a conservative/Republican viewpoint here https://drgo.us/history-of-gun-control/That being said, it doesn't take very much logic and research to find out that the conservative viewpoint isn't very far off from the actual truth, which was the CDC came in with an agenda to flat out ban guns, and used an extremely suspect study as their main piece of evidence. On February 16 2018 09:52 Plansix wrote:On February 16 2018 09:43 superstartran wrote:On February 15 2018 10:07 Plansix wrote:
There is no reasons to even argue that this will impact anything. We have not passed substantive gun laws at the federal level for +20 years. The CDC or any government agency cannot collect data on gun violence. After sandy hook the senate and House didn’t even have a debate about guns or debate a single bill. They didn’t even talk about it. But they did admonish Obama for talking about it. The gun manufacturers lobby, NRA and gun lovers have won for 20 year and there is no sign of that changing in the next ten. That's because the last time the CDC tried to gather data, they were led by a team of people who were politically motivated to basically institute a full out gun ban. Not to mention that their study and data was severely flawed, and were thoroughly debunked by multiple people. The NRA wasn't without fault; they definitely went way too far in that it wasn't an outright ban, but it did basically caused the CDC to never touch the subject again. However, don't try and spin it as though the left and the CDC didn't attempt their own political spin on the subject, they were out to basically institute a fullout gun ban which was and still is not feasible for multiple reasons. Everything you says is likely true, but I don't give a shit. Its been +20 years, we have endless school shootings and background check system is as dysfunctional as ever. You got your way for 2 decades and the CDC couldn't collect data and everyone that wants guns can get guns. Including 18 year old kids that were kicked out of their high school for being violence and return to kill 17 of their former classmates. Our country has solved bigger problems than this and we can find a way to collect data on fire arms that won't be framed in an effort to create a gun ban. We can find people to do that and take that job seriously. Edit: And lets not forget - Florida had this problem 2 years ago: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orlando_nightclub_shootingAgain, all fire arms purchased legally. The state did nothing after that shooting and the laws are unchanged. Arguing from emotion will do nothing. I am not against stricter gun control laws; the real issue is that people react from emotion rather than logic and don't actually solve anything. People think that there are mass shooters literally everywhere; that's not true at all. From the late 1980s to about 2016, violent crime rates dropped by a tremendous amount. They have risen since 2016, but we don't have enough data to attribute that to anything. It could be from mass shootings, the lack of police response to high urban areas for fear of scrutiny, etc. Arguing from emotion is how gun owners and the gun lobby have won this debate for 20 year. There has never been a substantive threat of a gun ban or any measure of gun control that would involve the stripping of fire arms. Yet the NRA and gun lobby stokes those fears every time a democrat is elected. Why would I give up the tool the gun lobby and gun supporters have so effective used for two decades? Because it is effective any undercuts your argument ? Quoting violent crime rates isn’t particularly productive when school shootings have become a fear of every parent. The reality of the matter is people feel unsafe and school shootings are more common than ever. I'm confused, because last time I checked + Show Spoiler +“We’re going to systematically build a case that owning firearms causes deaths. We’re doing the most we can do, given the political realities.” (P.W. O’Carroll, Acting Section Head of Division of Injury Control, CDC, quoted in Marsha F. Goldsmith, “Epidemiologists Aim at New Target: Health Risk of Handgun Proliferation,” Journal of the American Medical Association vol. 261 no. 5, February 3, 1989, pp. 675-76.) “Guns are a virus that must be eradicated.”—Dr. Katherine Christoffel, pediatrician, in American Medical News, January 3, 1994. “Data on [assault weapons’] risks are not needed, because they have no redeeming social value.—Jerome Kassirer, M.D., former editor, New England Journal of Medicine, writing in vol. 326, no. 17, page 1161 (April 23, 1992). "We need to revolutionize the way we look at guns, like what we did with cigarettes. It used to be that smoking was a glamour symbol -- cool, sexy, macho. Now it is dirty, deadly -- and banned." - Rosenberg, CDC Director What year is it? And when did the CDC write gun legislation? You realize that the CDC actually did studies in 2003 and 2013 and found no discernible evidence regarding the linking of gun control laws and fire arm related crimes right? But why would you let facts get in the way of fitting your narrative. You're right, it's fucking an atrocity and terrible that those teachers and children were killed by some scumbag who couldn't handle the world, so he took it out on innocent people. But you need to fucking slow the fuck down first, and think first. Remember, I am not against additional realistic and effective gun control, as neither are many members of the NRA despite popular opinion. The only thing many of us are trying to say is that the liberal left tends to try and paint firearms in a very negative light for no reason other than to push their own agenda. It seems pretty clear that the bulk of the NRA and Republican lawmakers are in no way in favor of additional gun control. It also seems like you're ignoring facts if you're in favor of additional gun control even though the CDC found that additional gun control doesn't help.
The CDC found that current gun control laws are ineffective because the vast majority of them were created by a bunch of numbskull politicians that couldn't tell a 9mm round from a .458
Most NRA members are in favor of sensible gun control laws that will assist and curbing violent firearm related crimes. The real crux of the issue is that the left imposes some ridiculous law/notion, which then promptly gets shot down because it's not realistic and will not help anyone.
One thing that could be pushed for example is a heavy tax on long rifle semi-automatic weapons along with stricter regulations (such as you have to be 21 or older, etc). Expanded background checks (which to some degree work), along with various other things. None of these things are unrealistic or unobtainable; most moderate NRA members don't actually disagree on gun control, and for the vast majority of the NRAs history (from the 1920s to about the early 1980s) the NRA actually was the organization that pushed for most of the sensible gun control legislation. It's not until when the left went on a crazy gun crusade during the 80s and 90s during the drug epidemics did the NRA (mostly NRA leadership) take a hard line stance.
|
|
|
To bad the NRA no longer gets the majority of its funding from members. And your argument about federal gun laws being to hard is garbage. Congress does not need to ban or restrict anything. They could provide funding for better background checks and data bases, more money for law enforcement to track down illegal gun, more money for mental health services, clear guidance for judges on when someone can have their fire arms removed due to mental health reasons. And so on.
The evidence is over whelming that the NRA and Republican Party does not support passing or funding anything that would address gun violence in the US. Our only recourse, as far as they are concerned, is to buy a gun so we can protect ourselves from the guns being sold to crimals. It’s like owning a fitness center and a chocolate bar factory.
|
No, it explicitly does not ban the CDC from studying firearm violence, otherwise the 2003 and 2013 studies wouldn't exist. The CDC is simply too scared to do so because they were put in their place in the early 90s for using a shitty fucking study.
|
@ superstartran: Have you even read the article, I've linked?
Because it seems to me you're talking out of you ass right now....
|
The restrictions that the ATF has to use phones and card catalog to track fire arms, legal or illegal, is my favorite. They can’t use email or a PC. This some common sense gun laws right here. In now way was that written to prevent building a case against illegal fire arms sales from gun dealers. Not a chance the NRA pushed that on behalf of the gun manufacturers.
Edit: the CDC won’t do it because the NRA will call up a senator and that employee will be in front of congress, fired or worse. It’s censorship.
|
On February 16 2018 12:28 thePunGun wrote:
@ superstartran: Have you even read the article, I've linked?
Because it seems to me you're talking out of you ass right now....
Actual language of the bill
"none of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) may be used to advocate or promote gun control."
It does not say that the CDC cannot study firearm related violence. We've already gone over why this amendment was created in the first place.
|
I'm so fuckin tired of this endless bullshit cycle repeating itself, that's why I have no respect for politcians they're just a bunch of spineless cowards....
edit:
@superstartran:
Must be nice to be dazzled by your own little bullshit bubble, careful don't let reality get too close or it might just pop one day.
|
On February 16 2018 12:23 Plansix wrote:
To bad the NRA no longer gets the majority of its funding from members. And your argument about federal gun laws being to hard is garbage. Congress does not need to ban or restrict anything. They could provide funding for better background checks and data bases, more money for law enforcement to track down illegal gun, more money for mental health services, clear guidance for judges on when someone can have their fire arms removed due to mental health reasons. And so on.
The evidence is over whelming that the NRA and Republican Party does not support passing or funding anything that would address gun violence in the US. Our only recourse, as far as they are concerned, is to buy a gun so we can protect ourselves from the guns being sold to crimals. It’s like owning a fitness center and a chocolate bar factory.
Most of the NRA leaders are hardliners; the vast majority of NRA members who are not in leadership roles however do not oppose things like expanded background checks. It's funny because the person who introduced the expanded background check legislation was actually a moderate NRA member, and the reason why it was defeated was really because some Democrats flipped in the more conservative states (fearing that they would not be elected again), otherwise it would have been passed already.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
